Misplaced Pages

Talk:Yom Kippur War: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:25, 6 October 2024 editHohum (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers68,505 edits Atrocities← Previous edit Revision as of 22:39, 6 October 2024 edit undo2a02:ce0:2002:6a8e:6480:4df0:db14:326e (talk) Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 October 2024: new sectionNext edit →
Line 170: Line 170:
That would make it an almost unique war, or suggest a bias in Misplaced Pages. (Athough Misplaced Pages is almost uniquely manipulable by determined actors as a result of its anyone-can-edit method of updating).. ] (]) 19:46, 2 October 2024 (UTC) That would make it an almost unique war, or suggest a bias in Misplaced Pages. (Athough Misplaced Pages is almost uniquely manipulable by determined actors as a result of its anyone-can-edit method of updating).. ] (]) 19:46, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
:Do you have ] sources which document Israeli atrocities? (] ]) 16:25, 6 October 2024 (UTC) :Do you have ] sources which document Israeli atrocities? (] ]) 16:25, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 October 2024 ==

{{edit extended-protected|Yom Kippur War|answered=no}}
I request to edit some information regarding the results of the war ] (]) 22:39, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:39, 6 October 2024

Skip to table of contents
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Yom Kippur War article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9Auto-archiving period: 3 months 
Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting.
Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

  • You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
  • You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Further information
The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:
  1. Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
  2. Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.

With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:

  • Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
  • Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.

After being warned, contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.
Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!

Before requesting any edits to this protected article, please familiarise yourself with reliable sourcing requirements.

Before posting an edit request on this talk page, please read the reliable sourcing and original research policies. These policies require that information in Misplaced Pages articles be supported by citations from reliable independent sources, and disallow your personal views, observations, interpretations, analyses, or anecdotes from being used.

Only content verified by subject experts and other reliable sources may be included, and uncited material may be removed without notice. If your complaint is about an assertion made in the article, check first to see if your proposed change is supported by reliable sources. If it is not, it is highly unlikely that your request will be granted. Checking the archives for previous discussions may provide more information. Requests which do not provide citations from reliable sources, or rely on unreliable sources, may be subject to closure without any other response.

Former featured articleYom Kippur War is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 30, 2006.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 14, 2005Featured article candidatePromoted
April 8, 2006Featured article reviewKept
November 6, 2011Featured article reviewDemoted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on May 31, 2004, May 31, 2005, May 31, 2007, October 6, 2007, May 31, 2008, October 6, 2008, October 6, 2009, October 6, 2010, and October 6, 2013.
Current status: Former featured article
This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.
WikiProject iconMilitary history: African / Middle East / Cold War C‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
CThis article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.
B checklist
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
  1. Referencing and citation: criterion met
  2. Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met
  3. Structure: criterion met
  4. Grammar and style: criterion met
  5. Supporting materials: criterion met
Associated task forces:
Taskforce icon
African military history task force
Taskforce icon
Middle Eastern military history task force
Taskforce icon
Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989)
WikiProject iconEgypt High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Egypt on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EgyptWikipedia:WikiProject EgyptTemplate:WikiProject EgyptEgypt
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconIsrael Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Project Israel To Do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
WikiProject iconPalestine High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic Palestine region, the Palestinian people and the State of Palestine on Misplaced Pages. Join us by visiting the project page, where you can add your name to the list of members where you can contribute to the discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconJewish history High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish history on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Jewish historyWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish historyTemplate:WikiProject Jewish historyJewish history-related
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconSyria High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Syria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Syria on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SyriaWikipedia:WikiProject SyriaTemplate:WikiProject SyriaSyria
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconArab world Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Arab world, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Arab world on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Arab worldWikipedia:WikiProject Arab worldTemplate:WikiProject Arab worldArab world
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconIraq Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Iraq, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Iraq on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IraqWikipedia:WikiProject IraqTemplate:WikiProject IraqIraq
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Media mentionThis Talk:Yom Kippur War has been mentioned by a media organization:

To-do list for Yom Kippur War: edit·history·watch·refresh· Updated 2024-06-06

  • Reanalyze the extent to which this conflict was, in fact, a victory for Egypt. (By forcing peace through a position of power Egypt achieved its primary objective of regaining control of the Sinai (this is a backwards read of the reality. egypt lost its bargaining position by its loss of its patron the soviet union, and was instead forced to negotiate for the sinai and recognize Israel. this meant a major loss of prestige and it's ejection from the arab league)).
  • Point to peace initiatives:
    • From Sadat in 1971 and in February 1973 - They both were rejected by Golda Meir's government leaving no choice to the Egyptians to get in the war.
    • From Golda: On 28 February 1973, during a visit in Washington, Golda agreed with Henry Kissinger's peace proposal based on "security versus sovereignty" : Israel would accept Egyptian sovereignty over all Sinai, while Egypt would accept Israeli presence in some of Sinai strategic positions.; The Rabin Memoirs Sadat refused this proposal.

  1. Yitzhak Rabin (1996). The Rabin Memoirs. University of California Press. p. 215. ISBN 978-0-520-20766-0. security versus sovereignty"...Israel would have to accept Egyptian sovereignty over all the Sinai, while Egypt ,in turn, would have to accept Israeli military presence in certain strategic positions.
  2. P.R. Kumaraswamy (11 January 2013). Revisiting the Yom Kippur War. Routledge. pp. 105–. ISBN 978-1-136-32895-4.
Priority 1 (top)
Section sizes
Section size for Yom Kippur War (63 sections)
Section name Byte
count
Section
total
(Top) 15,291 15,291
Background 111 24,846
Arab–Israeli conflict 11,255 11,255
Lead up to the war 9,807 9,807
Israeli preparation 3,673 3,673
Sinai front 3,890 62,104
Egyptian attack 11,818 11,818
Failed Israeli counter-attack 3,941 3,941
Temporary stabilization 1,780 1,780
Battle of the Sinai 3,585 3,585
Israeli breakthrough and crossing of the Suez Canal 5,231 5,231
Securing the bridgehead 1,639 1,639
Egyptian response to the Israeli crossing 4,136 4,136
Israeli forces across the Suez 9,382 9,382
The ceasefire and further battles 4,014 4,014
Battle of Suez 1,281 1,281
Egypt's trapped Third Army 5,735 5,735
Post-war battles 2,854 2,854
Final situation on the Egyptian front 2,818 2,818
Golan front 17 42,684
Initial Syrian attacks 8,226 8,226
Defense of the Quneitra Gap 3,631 3,631
Syrian breakthrough in the Southern Golan 5,820 5,820
Israeli strategic response 5,838 5,838
Collapse of the Israeli 188th Armored Brigade 6,459 6,459
Israel retakes the southern Golan 1,867 1,867
Israeli advance towards Damascus 3,234 3,234
Arab military intervention 4,640 4,640
Northern front de-escalation 1,480 1,480
Jordanian participation 1,472 1,472
Naval operations 7,950 9,492
U.S.–Soviet naval standoff 1,542 1,542
Participation by other states 35 36,964
U.S. intelligence efforts 1,570 1,570
U.S. aid to Israel 13,586 13,586
Aid to Egypt and Syria 30 20,615
Soviet supplies 2,804 2,804
Soviet active aid 3,217 3,217
Soviet intervention threat 5,647 5,647
Other countries 8,917 8,917
Palestinian attacks from Lebanese territory 1,158 1,158
UN-backed ceasefire 2,315 2,315
Disengagement 3,361 3,361
Reactions 14 7,685
Response in Israel 3,006 3,006
Response in Egypt 1,470 1,470
Response in Syria 1,744 1,744
Response in the Soviet Union 772 772
Arab oil embargo 679 679
Aftermath 7,462 14,706
Egyptian–Israeli disengagement agreement 901 901
Egyptian–Israeli Camp David Accords 2,727 2,727
U.S. military doctrine 3,616 3,616
Casualties 4,829 4,829
Atrocities 16 8,020
Syrian atrocities 4,936 4,936
Egyptian atrocities 3,068 3,068
See also 1,391 1,391
References 15 16,544
Notes 26 26
Citations 1,874 1,874
Bibliography 14,629 14,629
External links 2,009 2,009
Total 252,241 252,241

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 5 June 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I believe some parts of this article should be rewritten so they are not just copied from "The Yom Kippur War" by Abraham Rabinovich. Most notably this part is word-for-word from the book and quite awkward, in my opinion: On the night of 25 September, Hussein secretly flew to Tel Aviv to warn Meir of an impending Syrian attack. "Are they going to war without the Egyptians, asked Mrs. Meir. The king said he didn't think so. 'I think they would cooperate.' Shlokie (talk) 11:20, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

 Note: Given that it's a quote, you expect it to be copied word for word. M.Bitton (talk) 15:04, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
 Not done for now: Please address the concerns presented. Geardona (talk to me?) 01:03, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

The result is inconclusive, not “Israeli victory”

It is getting tiring with how useless bringing up this topic is and how it falls on deaf ears, but the second the result of this war gets changed from “Israeli victory” it gets reverted immediately. This is a bias that is not even present on the Hebrew Misplaced Pages, and makes Misplaced Pages’s policy of neutrality falter

Here are why the result of this war are “inconclusive”

https://time.com/6322802/yom-kippur-war-israel-history/

“ In 1973, Egypt’s goal in crossing the Suez Canal was to force Israel to the negotiation table to make a peace deal and get back control of the Sinai peninsula. According to Avi Shilon, a historian who teaches at Tel-Hai College in Israel, “The Egyptian and the Syrians didn't plan to conquer Israel. They planned to hit Israel and to force Israel to go into negotiations. For them, it was enough to hit Israel to show that they can beat Israel in the first days, and they preferred to stop, so it was easier for Israel to launch a retaliation attack.”

This outlines Egypts goal of the war, which was to cross the suez and not conquer Sinai or Israel proper. Israel counterattacked, but they failed to repulse the Egyptian army occupying most of the suez

The Israeli military failure to capture two small towns in their supposed legendary encirclement that Misplaced Pages uses to construct the basis of the delusion of “Israeli victory”

A declassified CIA document

https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/1975-09-01A.pdf

The CIA asserts is as a fact that the war was inconclusive.

Not only that, but mentioning Israel was “100 kn from Cairo” is another perpetuation of Misplaced Pages delusion. If I am 50 metres from a house, and I step outside and take two steps it is not worth mentioning I am 48 metres from it. Israel’s starting point was the Suez Canal, “100 km from Cairo” is another form of coping, to legitimise a victory that doesn’t exist The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 08:01, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

The first conclusion is your own, not a specifically stated result in the source. The second, while it does at least say "the fact is that the war ended on a militarily inconclusive note." on page 24. However, this is a 49 year old primary source report made 2 years after the events - it lacks any information gathered since. It was released in 2012, so it has been available for historians to use in secondary works for over a decade.
You will get a lot more traction using WP:secondary sources from reliable military historians. The article already uses these to support a different conclusion though. (Hohum ) 15:13, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
Several sources do describe it as a stalemate or inclusive, far from the “Israeli victory” oversimplification, which isn’t even correct neither militarily nor politically
Many sources regard the war as a stalemate, even on the Syrian front
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1974/03/who-lost-the-yom-kippur-war-a-military-inventory-of-the-middle-east/670833/
Here Henry Kissinger states “it would be a nightmare if either side won”, implying neither side got a conclusive victory
https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/henry-kissinger/2019-08-09/kissinger-told-soviet-envoy-during-1973-arab-israeli-war-my-nightmare-victory-either-side-soviet
This one is hidden by a paywall
https://www.lemonde.fr/en/history/article/2023/10/02/50th-anniversary-of-yom-kippur-war-the-enduring-ambiguity-of-pax-americana_6143516_157.html
The new Arab, I am not sure if it’s RS, also states that it is a stalemate
https://www.newarab.com/analysis/october-war-nothing-bloody-stalemate?amp
“Which had nearly resulted in Israel’s defeat, but ended in a stalemate”
https://www.historytoday.com/archive/no-victor-no-vanquished-yom-kippur-war
This is ignoring Israel’s defeat at two small towns during the final battles of the war, as well as an air battle, which saw an Egyptian victory. “Israeli victory” also COMPLETELY ignores the result of the war, seeing Israel actually come to negotiate Sinai which is had adamantly refused in the ] and ], both before the war The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 17:35, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
"You will get a lot more traction using WP:secondary sources from reliable military historians. "
Shotgunning google search results isn't helpful. Kissinger "implying" is actually you inferring. (Hohum ) 17:44, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
I’ve given plenty of secondary sources no? What would “if either side had won” would otherwise imply? The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 05:23, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Henry Kissinger memoranda of telephone conversations – or telcons – from October 1973, uncovered by the National Security Archive, provide blunt and fascinating vignettes from a significant moment during the Nixon presidency. In one record about the Yom Kippur War, the secretary of state candidly tells Soviet envoy Anatoly Dobrynin it would be a “nightmare” if either side won.

The leading sentences, and the tense of the statement make it very clear that he is speaking before the war has ended.
You are also ignoring half of this sentence: "You will get a lot more traction using WP:secondary sources from reliable military historians."
Don't expect another reply unless you provide useable sources that explicitly support your point. (Hohum ) 17:56, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Frankly, the war being “an Israeli victory” can be disproven with common sense instead of some strange criteria about the species of sources considering you have been dismissing everything I provided even though it is beyond sufficient to explain why the “result” is something from an alternate history timeline. But here we go, hopefully this is good enough.
https://bootcampmilitaryfitnessinstitute.com/2021/11/23/what-was-the-yom-kippur-war-1973/
“Despite being surrounded, the Third Army managed to maintain its combat integrity east of the canal and keep up its defensive positions, to the surprise of many. According to Trevor N.
Dupuy, the Israelis, Soviets and Americans overestimated the vulnerability of the Third Army at the time. It was not on the verge of collapse, and he wrote that while a renewed Israeli offensive would probably overcome it, this was not a certainty.”
There are some military men who argued that the encirclement would have destroyed the third army, let’s look at what David Elazar, one of the generals during the war said according to this source
“According to David Elazar, Chief of Israeli headquarters staff, on 3
December 1973: "As for the third army, in spite of our encircling them they resisted and advanced to occupy in fact a wider area of land at the east.
Thus, we can not say that we defeated or conquered them””
And further
“Shortly before the ceasefire came into effect, an Israeli tank battalion advanced into Adabiya, and took it with support from the Israeli Navy. Some 1,500 Egyptian prisoners were taken, and about a hundred Egyptian soldiers assembled just south of Adabiya, where they held out against the Israelis. The Israelis also conducted their third and final incursion into Suez. They made some gains, but failed to break into the city centre. As a result, the city was partitioned down the main street, with the Egyptians holding the city centre and the Israelis controlling the outskirts, port installations and oil refinery, effectively surrounding the Egyptian defenders”
Showing an Israeli failure at the defeat too. This is also not mentioning the fact that Misplaced Pages completely ignores the effect of the war and its result which led Israel to negotiate after adamantly refusing 2-times pre war
The CIA says it’s inconclusive
Several sources and military analysts say it’s inconclusive
Israeli generals say they couldn’t defeat the Egyptians
Yet Misplaced Pages is adamant to simply this war with the most incorrect, misleading, and simplified result that ignores reality itself The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 04:35, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

So, after failing to gain consensus, you just go ahead and make changes which have led to many reliable sources which frame the war as an Isaeli victory being discarded, and add few pretty poor ones that say it's inconclusive. diff. (Hohum ) 00:37, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

I agree, the result should say "Israeli victory" there's no consensus to change that, please put that back Andre🚐 00:50, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
The result being “see aftermath” does not seem to be disputed either way. The aftermath section is more comprehensive, and explains why the result is not an Israeli victory. It has several sources, including Israeli officer David elazar who resigned after the war, stating that they had been unable to defeat Egypt in the war. I have included several sources and citations, including books that demonstrate the result of the war was a stalemate on both fronts

Do also note, that I initially said “inconclusive”, which has been changed to “see aftermath” which is usually the case with wars that have controversial results, and this is a notable example of such. The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 07:20, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Disagree. 1) No consensus for your changes. 2) See aftermath clearly shows that military historians agree it was an Israeli victory in the war, which is why that is what the infobox should read. Andre🚐 07:29, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
The aftermath section very clearly states how it is a stalemate, and not an Israeli victory. If I am not mistaken, you initially assumed that this was the six day war (and it’s fine, the wars were close and had the same belligerents so confusion is possible)
The “Israeli victory” does not seem to be established, looking through the old page archive it is a simplification of the old result (Israeli tactical victory, Egyptian pyrrhic victory, and the un ceasefire) about a decade and a half ago. The assertion of “Israeli victory” is also disproven by the page’s very lede, which shows that Egypt was able to successfully achieve its goals in the war (capture eastern suez, and negotiate the rest of the Sinai peninsula), both of which did happen The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 09:06, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
That's OR and SYNTH. Every history text clearly establishes. We have about 20 references. More importantly, you've not established a consensus for your changes here. And I have no idea what you're referring to about confusion with the 1967 war. That seems to be a groundless assertion. I'm bringing this to WP:NPOVN. Andre🚐 18:35, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
I think it’s a good place to discuss it there. I’ve seen the message there and will participate too The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 04:58, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Short-form (harv/sfn) reference formatting

This is a minor issue compared to the content questions, but the short-form references in the article are in a wide range of formats (plain-text vs templated, parenthesised vs without brackets). I propose to convert them all to parenthesised style and to use templates – i.e. to use {{sfnp}} and/or {{harvp}} – and to flag any references where the long-form bibliographic information about the source is missing. I'm happy to do the conversion myself, but, given this is a fairly sensitive article, I would like to check for disagreement / consensus here first. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 20:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Since nobody has commented in a week and a half I am going to start on this, using sfnp/harvp. Given the article has 485 references it might take me a while, though... Wham2001 (talk) 19:14, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 September 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change:Adding the United States of America to the Israeli side. Reason:Operation Nickel Grass. Here is an article explaining how important the operation was (https://responsiblestatecraft.org/yom-kippur-war/). This clearly shows the USA was on the side of Israeli,it saved the whole country. Grinch the great (talk) 01:40, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

 Done Skitash (talk) 01:51, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages language differences

Thanks,uh also quick question,why are the pages so different in other languages. For example,the spanish translation has France, the UK,USA and Greece on the Israeli side, and on the Egyptian side,somehow east Germany is on there?? This makes no sense as the results differ in other translations. Grinch the great (talk) 02:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
Some articles in other language show the supporters in full, like any country that supported Israel with weapons in for example the Yom Kippur war. Misplaced Pages English generally limits the infobox to countries that directly participated in the conflict, though conflicts sometimes have a “supported by” section The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 08:28, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
That’s just extremely confusing and stupid. The whole page in each language should be 100% accurate,any thing that doesn’t show the same exact information could be considered altering history and being biased. This page is very controversial since both sides still dislike each other to this day and would do anything to look stronger,so if the pages are not the same in all languages,then Misplaced Pages can’t be trusted anymore,if one single page has an biased view,how am I supposed to trust the others?
also I read through the other shit on this thing,it’s very clear that many of the editors who replied to your suggestions are biased. That’s like letting a nazi sympathizer edit the holocaust page. Grinch the great (talk) 12:58, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
In an ideal world, articles in different languages would match. We don't live in an ideal world. This article is available in 79 languages. It is difficult enough getting agreement on article content between editors of the same language, let alone many different ones. I also suggest you go and read WP:AGF and cease berating other editors. (Hohum ) 15:07, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
You misunderstood my words. I am not berating anyone,just at least make the dominant languages similar,like Spanish, English,Arabic,etc. And so what if we don’t live in an ideal world? What’s wrong with trying? That point was just so hypocritical since I could use it on anything: “in an ideal world,child rape is punishable with death. We don’t live in an ideal world.”
I am willing to learn any language in a few weeks/months just to correct one single mistake. Grinch the great (talk) 19:58, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
Good luck. (Hohum ) 20:06, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Atrocities

"Syrian atrocities", "Egyptian atrocities" but no Israeli atrocities? That would make it an almost unique war, or suggest a bias in Misplaced Pages. (Athough Misplaced Pages is almost uniquely manipulable by determined actors as a result of its anyone-can-edit method of updating).. 86.160.95.7 (talk) 19:46, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Do you have WP:reliable sources which document Israeli atrocities? (Hohum ) 16:25, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 October 2024

It is requested that an edit be made to the extended-confirmed-protected article at Yom Kippur War. (edit · history · last · links · protection log)

This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".

The edit may be made by any extended confirmed user. Remember to change the |answered=no parameter to "yes" when the request has been accepted, rejected or on hold awaiting user input. This is so that inactive or completed requests don't needlessly fill up the edit requests category. You may also wish to use the {{EEp}} template in the response. To request that a page be protected or unprotected, make a protection request.

I request to edit some information regarding the results of the war 2A02:CE0:2002:6A8E:6480:4DF0:DB14:326E (talk) 22:39, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Categories: